Truth or Ideology?

The left doesn't acknowledge a natural order of being based on an archetypal reality. For them everything is a cultural or so called social construct. But the spiritually aware know that there is an objective reality to which we, both individually and collectively, should conform if we are to be what we should. 

The left doesn't understand intuition or even, it seems, common sense. It goes by ideology which simply means a theory of how it thinks things ought to be. Reality must be cut down to fit in its ideological box. Bits that don't or won't fit in must be discarded or dismissed as lies and prejudices. 

What is at the root of this? I have watched in amazement as humanity has rejected so much truth in my lifetime, and that was starting off from a fairly low base! From studying people on the left the conclusion I have come to is that they are often motivated, whether they know it or not, by a hatred of God. 

This will seem absurd to many of them.  God doesn't even enter the picture, they would say. But he doesn't because they have rejected him and that is because the idea of God interferes with their desires and prejudices, with their selves. So they are forced to make something up (for that's what this all amounts to) to replace him. 

Some on the left might accept God but only in terms of their leftism which is paramount and to which his reality must be adjusted; the spiritual inclining to the political which is a complete hierarchical reversal.  It does seem to be axiomatic that any small amount of leftism in an individual will infect everything else. That is why it must all be rejected, though not, of course, the humanitarianism that is held to be its root and raison d'etre. But this humanitarianism has to be seen in the context of the primacy of God, and the fact that we are spiritual beings in material form not solely, or even principally, material beings.

The solution to our current impasse (and anyone who doesn't recognise that we have struck a wall in terms of direction has their eyes and mind both shut) is very simple. We have to abandon ideology. We have to return to a religious attitude to life which sees its essence as not in itself, as defined in physical terms, but in something greater than itself. Something beyond itself. You might say this too is ideology, just a religious one, but that is not so. It is an acknowledgement of what we all know in our hearts. It is not an intellectual thing, although it can become that. But really it is not a thought about life, and therefore something that is split off from what we actually are, but a deep feeling about it and so it is totally in tune with the essence of our being. 

That is the difference between ideology and truth. Truth encompasses one's whole being. Ideology only relates to the head.

By the way, the modern code of right behaviour or political correctness, sometimes justified as simple politeness, is actually the enforcement of ideological theory and thus fundamentally anti-truth. It must be rejected if one wants to escape the strait jacket of ideology and return to truth. Not that I am advocating either a return to the past as it was or a political lurch to the right as seems to be beginning in reaction to leftist ideology in several countries now. We need to go beyond and above both left and right to find truth which is not in politics. The fact is, though, that current ideological possession in the West is almost exclusively through the left. 

Quality and Equality

The great modern drive by the fallen angels who are at war against God is to replace quality with equality. In this way they hope to reduce humanity to a controllable and conformist mass, cut off from any higher understanding than the materialistic. This is why such things as racism and sexism have become the equivalents of secular mortal sins. Anything that offends the idea of equality and oneness must be shown to be evil. Today if somebody is branded a racist he is effectively the lowest of the low, and we all live in fear that we may make a mistake and end up condemned.

Unfortunately by the standards of the modern left, which has become the main conduit for this tactic, I am a racist because I believe there are differences between ethnic groups which have been separated in evolutionary terms for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. That is not even bringing any what, for want of a better term, we might call occult factors (unrecognised by a science inevitably limited to its own material sphere) into account¹. It is beside the point to say we are all one and these differences don't matter. Of course we are all one and of course the differences don't affect the fundamental brotherhood of man. All life is one in essence but it is hugely varied in expression. There is no absolute equality anywhere. It is certainly a mistake to over-emphasise the differences at the expense of the unity, as has happened in the past, but it is also a mistake to do the opposite, as we do nowadays, and over-emphasise the unity at the expense of the differences. The truth is not one or the other but both together, and if both are not respected then disharmony will be the result².

By modern standards I am also a sexist because I believe there are differences between men and women that go much further than basic biology. The biology is just an outer reflection of a deeper spiritual truth. Again, enforced equality, such as we have now, which tries to shoehorn everything into the same mould, will lead to disharmony and reaction. You cannot suppress the truth with ideology. Or you can try but there will be inevitable consequences if you do.  But the demons win either way. They can corrupt our souls with their anti-truth and anti-God agenda or, if there is a violent reaction to the lies they are making humanity believe, they can benefit from that too, from the destruction that ensues. They feed on hatred and anger.

Most ordinary people reading the paragraphs above would think the writer deluded at best. Demons behind the scenes, manipulating our consciousness? That's crazy! But I think increasingly people will look at what's happening in the world and wonder how things can have come to this pass. Can humanity really have taken so many turns that completely deny common sense and are so against nature, let alone the idea of God as traditionally conceived? How have we allowed ourselves to be driven down this path, persuaded to abandon real goodness and truth in the name of a demonstrably false goodness and truth? I say demonstrably because practically every innovation we have allowed over the last 50 years, from on demand abortion to mass immigration to same sex marriage to the current push for transgender acceptance, goes against basic intuition. Quite obviously in none of these cases should people be condemned or treated unfairly. However that is very different to normalising them all. But we are being programmed to think that what goes against nature is natural, and that must affect our connection to real truth. I mean it must affect us as in separate us from it, and that is the demons' intention. It is our souls they are after. And they do not want us to be dragged kicking and screaming into darkness. They want us to choose it as light.

Quite often today we are caught between two stools. We can see that injustice has been perpetrated on certain groups in the past. We quite rightly wish to remedy that. But appeals to compassion are exploited to bring about a situation in which the natural order of being is turned upside down and the baby of truth is thrown out with the bathwater of injustice. What we lack so much today is a balanced wisdom. We have discarded our spiritual inheritance completely instead of seeing that it needed a certain updating but was fundamentally sound. Jesus said he came to build on the Law and the Prophets. He did not come to replace them. These are words which we need to understand more than ever in the context of our present spiritual crisis.

The way forward is through love but not love as we currently understand it because we don't understand it. What we understand is a mental image of love, a theory about it. We don't feel love. We respond to life sentimentally which is what people do when they don't feel love but want to or think they should.  

Notes:

¹ What I mean by this is that I believe that souls do not all come from the same source at the same time. There are various lifestreams that originate from different spiritual sources and at different times. I am not saying these are represented by the different races but it is a cause of human differences. Of course, ultimately all come from God.

² From a deep spiritual point of view we are all one in Christ. There is no race, no sex, just a pure spiritual unity. "There is neither Jew nor Greek, neither bond nor free, neither male nor female: you are all one in Christ Jesus". But to apply this spiritual unity to men and women and groups of men and women before they have aligned themselves inwardly with spiritual truth is incorrect. The unity exists at the spiritual level (in Christ) not the material one. Men are by no means equal on the earth plane, said the Masters. It is precisely part of the modern deviation that unity is misapplied thereby negating its spiritual sense.

Miserere Nostri

There is a piece of music that for me perfectly encapsulates the attitude of penitence. According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica it "is an extraordinary feat of canonic writing, involving retrograde movement together with several degrees of augmentation." But that technical skill is put completely at the service of deep feeling to produce a miniature masterpiece, one in which the only words are Miserere nostri- Have mercy on us.

Listen to it here.

http://albionawakening.blogspot.co.uk/2018/03/miserere-nostri.html

Persons or Principles?

For a number of years I was under the impression that spiritual reality could best be known and articulated in the form of principles; abstract truths which could be accessed by the intuition (because I am not talking about a merely intellectual approach here) and then lived. Even though my spiritual formation was through the Masters, individual spiritual beings, I thought the higher attitude was to look for the principles behind them. And they did not discourage this because they would not have wanted me to get caught up in their personalities, something that clearly often proves a problem as can be seen from the history of cults and religious sects centred on a charismatic teacher, practically always with feet of clay, who requires devotion to his person as the price of entrance. At the same time, the Masters emphasised the importance of prayer, and prayer must necessarily be to a person.

I would still say that for the spiritual aspirant it is much better to focus on principles than personalities because this takes you away from the attachments of this world, and the pitfalls of the human ego, to something like pure spiritual truths. And yet there is something else. What if there is a higher sense in which principles actually are persons? What I mean is this.  Does everything not boil down to the question of whether God is personal or impersonal? If the latter then pure abstract principles are the best we are going to get. But if the former then the reality of persons trumps that of principles. 

For example, when Christ said "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life", did he mean that literally? I think that is precisely what he did mean. These things were not abstract principle that he embodied but they took their rise in him. And this is why he could say that God is love. Love is meaningless without the reality of persons. If reality, at bottom, is just principles then love is subsiduary to knowledge. It may not have any ultimate truth to it at all. But if reality, at bottom, is Persons, as in Father, Son and Holy Spirit, then love is real.

So now I think what I probably always felt when I allowed my intuition to take precedence over my thinking, and that is that God is, well, God and not an ultimately impersonal principle based on an abstraction. This means I am a Christian not a Buddhist since this is the crucial difference between the two religions. Not that I reject the Buddhist approach for it has much to recommend it as a way to step out of the illusionary nature of this material world. It can help to take us beyond the separate self which is the main barrier to spiritual knowledge. But I think it has a hole at its centre which can only be filled by a Person. 

Only if reality is personal can there be love. In the end nothing is truly real that is not personal, even if we must go beyond our customary limited identification with the separate self to discover this.

True Awakening Demands Deep Penitence

It seems to me that the way things currently are going any spiritual awakening is unlikely unless people are brought low by suffering. We are just too comfortable and too set in our materialistic ways to change course unless something dramatic, which forces us to change, takes place. I believe the powers that be have sought to avoid a scenario of suffering for some time but, spiritually speaking, humanity has just gone from bad to worse and is currently as far away from God as it has been for a long, long time. Our culture and our politics are all corrupt, our religion, such as it is, is ineffective and when we do turn to some idea of spirituality in the modern spiritual but not religious way, it is usually on our own terms and with no real sense of the Creator. Hence any spirituality of this sort is directed towards personal growth and does not include the metanoia that is essential for any genuine awakening.

Continued on Albion Awakening.

Simplicity

To continue with the theme of the previous post:

Spiritual truth is simple but it is easy to get lost in philosophical speculations which lead nowhere.

One of the things the Masters never ceased to emphasise to me was that spiritual truth is fundamentally simple. That doesn't mean it is naive or childish or even easy to understand. But it is pure and good and therefore uncomplicated, and consequently available to anyone whose heart is open and whose thinking has not been led astray by fashionable beliefs of the day or intellectual mind games.

However while spiritual truth is simple it also requires a seriousness and a depth of insight sufficient to understand that its real purpose is not to make us happy in this world or reduce suffering here but to take us beyond ourselves and this world to something greater. That is why current notions of spirituality as in some way being about healing are so wide of the mark. Healing of the psyche can be a preliminary to proper spirituality but should not be mistaken for it. Some of the greatest saints have been those who have suffered the most, both in mind and body. They did not look for healing but for putting themselves right with God. They did seek self-improvement or self-fulfilment but tried only to love God more deeply and do his will more completely. What could be simpler than that? And yet what is further away from us today when so many people believe they can follow a spiritual path without acknowledging the Creator or their own sins, or act as if spirituality were really just another, more sophisticated branch of consumerism?

The simplicity of spirituality means that it is a path of the heart more than the mind (which however is not excluded) but this truth has become stale through repetition and lost much of its meaning. It does not mean that the way to God is through feelings centred on the self, as in relating to emotional reactions and attachments, but it is through deeper feelings which are more akin to intuitions reaching beyond our personal thoughts and desires to something more universal and fundamental.

However the problem with intuition is that we often interpret it according to our pre-existing prejudices and preferences. That is because what we call our intuition is still undeveloped and our personal mind is much the stronger element within the totality of what we are. Our task then is to follow the intuitive thread more fully and not obscure dawning insights with misinterpretations or even distortions of those insights. This requires strict honesty and the ability to look at oneself objectively.

So spirituality is simple but it is not about the joy or sorrow of the earthly self nor is it about healing that self unless this is taken to mean setting right its fundamental disorder.  But that can only be done by aligning the soul to truth which means God who is best conceived of as our divine parent.  This sounds too simple, even sentimental, to some but Jesus called God Father so who are we to disagree? We have to assume he knew what he was talking about and meant what he said. This doesn't mean that God is exactly like an earthly father but that fatherhood, cosmically considered, best defines his essential nature. Of course, we can also conceive of God as pure existence if we wish but if we are concerned with a God that acts, that is something more than unexpressed being, then we have to think of him as a person. This is the God in whose image we are made. It is the God we are called upon to know.

When Jesus told his followers that unless they became like a child they would never enter the kingdom of heaven, he was emphasising this need for open-hearted simplicity. But note he said like a child. He was not recommending a reversion to childish ignorance or juvenile behaviour but saying that a complicated, calculating mind was a barrier to true wisdom. At the same time, the mind is a major part of what we are and cannot be neglected or sidelined. It must just be coordinated to the higher understanding of the spiritual intuition, the direct knowing which comes when the heart is rightly orientated to God. Then it is fulfilling its proper function.

God is inherently simple because he is the One from whom comes all the profuse variety of created life. But it is the world that is complicated. God is simple, and yet in that simplicity there is everything. How can we know him unless we become like him?